A Comparative Analysis of Outcomes Between Two Different Intramuscular Progesterone Preparations in Women Undergoing Frozen Embryo Transfer Cycles.

Q2 Medicine
Srividya Seshadri, Rabi Odia, Ozkan Ozturk, Wiam Saab, Ali AlChami, Xavier Viñals Gonzalez, Saba Salim, Wael Saab, Paul Serha
{"title":"A Comparative Analysis of Outcomes Between Two Different Intramuscular Progesterone Preparations in Women Undergoing Frozen Embryo Transfer Cycles.","authors":"Srividya Seshadri,&nbsp;Rabi Odia,&nbsp;Ozkan Ozturk,&nbsp;Wiam Saab,&nbsp;Ali AlChami,&nbsp;Xavier Viñals Gonzalez,&nbsp;Saba Salim,&nbsp;Wael Saab,&nbsp;Paul Serha","doi":"10.18502/jri.v23i1.8452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of the current study was to assess if luteal support with intramuscular (IM) 17 alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC) (Lentogest, IBSA, Italy) improves the pregnancy outcome in comparison to natural intramuscular progesterone (Prontogest, AMSA, Italy) when administered to recipients in a frozen embryo transfer cycle.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective comparative study was performed to evaluate outcomes between two different intramuscular regimens used for luteal support in frozen embryo transfer cycles in patients underwent autologous in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles (896 IVF cycles) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) who had a blastocyst transfer from February 2014 to March 2017 at the Centre for Reproductive and Genetic Health (CRGH) in London.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The live birth rates were significantly lower for the IM natural progesterone group when compared to 17-OHPC group (41.8% <i>vs</i>. 50.9%, adjusted OR of 0.63 (0.31-0.91)). The miscarriage rates were significantly lower in the 17-OHPC group compared to the IM natural progesterone group (14.5% <i>vs</i>. 19.2%, OR of 1.5, 95% CI of 1.13-2.11). The gestational age at birth and birth weight were similar in both groups (p=0.297 and p=0.966, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It is known that both intramuscular and vaginal progesterone preparations are the standard of care for luteal phase support in women having frozen embryo transfer cycles. However, there is no clear scientific consensus regarding the optimal luteal support. In this study, it was revealed that live birth rates are significantly higher in women who received artificial progesterone compared to women who received natural progesterone in frozen embryo transfer cycles.</p>","PeriodicalId":38826,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Reproduction and Infertility","volume":"23 1","pages":"46-53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/10/bc/JRI-23-46.PMC9361726.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Reproduction and Infertility","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jri.v23i1.8452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: The purpose of the current study was to assess if luteal support with intramuscular (IM) 17 alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC) (Lentogest, IBSA, Italy) improves the pregnancy outcome in comparison to natural intramuscular progesterone (Prontogest, AMSA, Italy) when administered to recipients in a frozen embryo transfer cycle.

Methods: A retrospective comparative study was performed to evaluate outcomes between two different intramuscular regimens used for luteal support in frozen embryo transfer cycles in patients underwent autologous in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles (896 IVF cycles) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) who had a blastocyst transfer from February 2014 to March 2017 at the Centre for Reproductive and Genetic Health (CRGH) in London.

Results: The live birth rates were significantly lower for the IM natural progesterone group when compared to 17-OHPC group (41.8% vs. 50.9%, adjusted OR of 0.63 (0.31-0.91)). The miscarriage rates were significantly lower in the 17-OHPC group compared to the IM natural progesterone group (14.5% vs. 19.2%, OR of 1.5, 95% CI of 1.13-2.11). The gestational age at birth and birth weight were similar in both groups (p=0.297 and p=0.966, respectively).

Conclusion: It is known that both intramuscular and vaginal progesterone preparations are the standard of care for luteal phase support in women having frozen embryo transfer cycles. However, there is no clear scientific consensus regarding the optimal luteal support. In this study, it was revealed that live birth rates are significantly higher in women who received artificial progesterone compared to women who received natural progesterone in frozen embryo transfer cycles.

两种不同肌内黄体酮制剂对冷冻胚胎移植周期女性预后的比较分析。
背景:本研究的目的是评估在冷冻胚胎移植周期中,与天然肌内黄体酮(Prontogest, AMSA,意大利)相比,肌内(IM) 17 α -羟孕酮己酸(17- ohpc)支持黄体是否能改善妊娠结局。方法:回顾性比较研究评估2014年2月至2017年3月在伦敦生殖与遗传健康中心(CRGH)进行囊胚移植的自体体外受精(IVF)周期(896个IVF周期)和胞浆内单精子注射(ICSI)患者在冷冻胚胎移植周期中用于黄体支持的两种不同肌肉注射方案的结果。结果:IM天然孕酮组的活产率明显低于17-OHPC组(41.8% vs. 50.9%,调整OR为0.63(0.31-0.91))。17-OHPC组的流产率明显低于IM天然孕酮组(14.5% vs. 19.2%, OR为1.5,95% CI为1.13-2.11)。两组新生儿的出生胎龄和出生体重相似(p=0.297和p=0.966)。结论:已知肌注和阴道黄体酮制剂是冷冻胚胎移植周期妇女黄体期支持的标准护理。然而,关于最佳的黄体支持没有明确的科学共识。在这项研究中,发现在冷冻胚胎移植周期中,接受人工黄体酮的妇女的活产率明显高于接受天然黄体酮的妇女。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Reproduction and Infertility
Journal of Reproduction and Infertility Medicine-Reproductive Medicine
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信